Patent fee for a Nokia mobile phone

I understand that neither party responded, but OPPO was at the previous press conference. When it comes to related content, it clearly opposes the high patent fees of some companies.

I think Nokia's behavior has always been clear. As long as it opposes charging high patent fees, it will be sued by Nokia. Nokia threatens all companies that oppose charging high patent fees. Only in this way can it stabilize and stop charging other companies high patent fees. Nokia announced a lot of patent fees, which have been very high so far.

First of all, Nokia sued OPPO for some purposes.

I understand that OPPO has always expressed its respect for intellectual property rights at many meetings and opposed some companies to overcharge patent fees. OPPO has always owned a lot of its own intellectual property rights, but it has always been a civilian price. OPPO also opposes Nokia charging too high patent fees for personal use products, which has far exceeded the market standards. These remarks touched Nokia. Nokia has many advanced intellectual property rights in many fields, and Nokia has not given up the high fees for these intellectual property rights. For example, on 20 18, Nokia once charged every 5G mobile phone manufacturer with a patent fee of 3 euros per mobile phone, equivalent to about 22.95 yuan, which is very expensive in the international market.

Second, I support OPPO's approach.

I think Nokia's charging requirements in the field of intellectual property are a bit excessive. It should follow the market rules and respond to the market mechanism. OPPO's business philosophy contributes to the development of intellectual property rights to a certain extent. For some companies, personal intellectual property rights are open and the fees are low. Although OPPO did not explain this matter too much, some previous statements of OPPO are enough to explain many problems. In this matter, I support OPPO's approach and oppose Nokia's mandatory policy.

Third, I think it's good not to respond.

I think it is a good state that both parties have not responded to the litigation relationship between some companies. If the two sides are really torn, they will actively respond to some questions and uncover the foundation of both sides, which is not good for the development of each company, so they will not respond. To a certain extent, both companies have exercised restraint and left room for some business negotiations in the future.